Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board - View Single Post - cam question
Thread: cam question
View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-18-2007, 03:50 PM
techinspector1's Avatar
techinspector1 techinspector1 is offline
Senior Curmudgeon
 
Last wiki edit: DynoSim combinations Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hemet, California, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 12,205
Wiki Edits: 326

Thanks: 594
Thanked 756 Times in 646 Posts
Using the same figures as in my above post for pistons, gaskets, etc., but with 76 cc heads, the static compression ratio would be 8.74:1. With that cr, I'd run a cam something like this:
http://www.cranecams.com/?show=brows...tType=camshaft

It's doubtful you're gonna make 300 horsepower with this combination though. It would just be a real nice daily driver type motor. Using 1.6 rockers on both intake and exhaust would yield a theoretical valve lift of 0.469". This cam is ground on a lobe separation angle of 110*. If you wanted a little more rump at idle, you could have it ground on 106* angle. It's a single pattern cam. You may want to look around for a dual pattern cam if you think it would help the exhaust side of the motor with stock heads. I'd be just as happy with a single pattern with this particular combination. Here's a dual pattern cam that is ground on 112* angle just so you can compare cams.
http://www.cranecams.com/?show=brows...tType=camshaft

Do not cut a check for a cam based on the information I've provided here. ALWAYS CALL YOUR FAVORITE CAM GRINDER FOR A DEFINITE RECOMMENDATION. I'm just trying to give you an idea of cams that would work with the info you've provided. A narrower angle such as 106* will give you a rump-rump idle and build good bottom end, but will peak quicker and lay down on the top end. A narrow angle may not provide enough manifold vacuum to operate power brakes properly. A wider angle such as 112* will give a smooth idle and excellent manifold vacuum for power brakes and such and will be stronger on the top end without giving up much on the bottom.

Last edited by techinspector1; 02-18-2007 at 03:55 PM.
Reply With Quote